Kerala High Court
Yohannan Baby Aged 48 Years vs State Of Kerala
Author: Antony Dominic
Bench: Antony Dominic
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC
THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF APRIL 2013/21ST CHAITHRA 1935
WP(C).No. 10331 of 2012 (N)
----------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
--------------------------
YOHANNAN BABY AGED 48 YEARS
S/O.LATE P.N.YOHANNAN, RESIDING AT MANJAKALAVILAYIL
35, MAMANGALAM, PALARIVATTOM.P.O.
KOCHI-682 025.
BY ADV. SRI.V.PHILIP MATHEW
RESPONDENT(S):
----------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, KERALA GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.695 001.
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
KOLLAM-691 001.
3. KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION
REPRESENTED BY MANAGING DIRECTOR
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.695 001.
4. DEPUTY COLLECTOR
REVENUE RECOVERY, KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.695 001.
5. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR
REVENUE RECOVERY, KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION
BEACH ROAD, KOLLAM-691 001.
6. MARYKUTTY BABY
W/O.YOHANNAN BABY
RESIDING AT MUZHAMOOTTIL KIZHEKETHIL HOUSE, VADACODE
KURA.P.O., THALAVOOR-691557.
7. SHINU JOHN
S/O.JOHN, CHARUVILA PUTHENVEEDU, VADACODE
KURA.P.O., THALAVOOR-691 557.
WP(C) No. 10331/12 -2-
Addl.8. PHILIP YOHANNAN
S.B.BHAVAN, KAITHACODE.P.O., PUTHOOR (VIA)
KOLLAM DISTRICT. PIN -691543.
(ADDL. R8 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 11/06/2012 IN IA 7695/2012.)
R3 BY ADV. SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI,SC,K.F.C.
R6 BY ADV. SRI.A.RAJASIMHAN
R7 BY ADV. SRI.SYAM J SAM
RADDL.8 BY ADV. SRI.SREEKANTH S.NAIR
BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.JOSEPH GEORGE
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11-04-2013,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WPC NO.10331/12
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1- COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 24.06.2011 ISSUED TO THE
PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P2- COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 08.08.2011 ISSUED TO THE
PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P3- COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 29.09.2011 ISSUED TO THE
PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P4- COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 20.10.2011 ISSUED TO THE
PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P5- COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 01.12.2011 ISSUED TO THE
PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P6- COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 21.02.2011 ISSUED TO THE
PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P7- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 04.04.2012 SUBMITTED BY
PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P8- COPY OF THE ELECTION IDENTITY CARD OF THE PETITIONER ISSUED
BY THE ELECTION COMMISSIONER OF INDIA.
EXHIBIT P9- COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPTS DATED 18.04.2012.
EXHIBIT P10-COPY OF THE PETITIONER'S DRIVING LICENSE.
EXHIBIT P11- COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE PETITIONER'S PASSBOOK
ISSUED BY CORPORATION BANK.
EXHIBIT P12- COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE PETITIONER'S PASSBOOK
ISSUED BY UNION BANK.
//True Copy//
PA to Judge
Rp
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
================
W.P.(C) NO. 10331 OF 2012
===================
Dated this the 11th day of April, 2013
J U D G M E N T
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1, 2, 4 and 5, the learned standing counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent and the learned counsel appearing for the additional 8th respondent.
2. Petitioner's wife, the 6th respondent had availed of a loan from the 3rd respondent and the petitioner was the guarantor for the loan in question. Default was committed in the matter of repayment and therefore recovery proceedings were initiated and the immovable property belonging to the petitioner was brought to sale. In the sale that was conducted on 28/3/12, the additional 8th respondent purchased the property and he deposited the entire sale consideration. At that stage, without availing of the remedies under the Revenue Recovery Act, petitioner filed this writ petition seeking to impugn the sale in favour of the 8th respondent. This Court entertained the writ petition and passed an interim order restraining the respondents from confirming the sale. As a result of the interim order, despite the payment made WPC.No.10331/12 :2 : by the additional 8th respondent, the sale is not confirmed and the property is also not delivered.
3. Although I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner on the merits of the contentions raised, I am not satisfied that the sale is vitiated for any reason justifying interference in this petition. At that stage, counsel for the petitioner submitted that this is the only property that he has and that he is residing in the said property. On that basis, he submitted that he wants to save the property and requested that he be allowed to pay the entire amount due to the KFC within a period of six weeks. As far as the additional 8th respondent is concerned, having regard to the long lapse of time, he is also anxious either to get the sale confirmed or to get the money refunded.
4. Taking note of the fact that the property involved is a residential property of the petitioner and if he is willing to pay the amount as undertaken before this Court, there is no reason to deny him an opportunity to save the property even at this belated stage. At the same time, the interest of the KFC as also the additional 8th respondent should be protected. WPC.No.10331/12 :3 :
5. Taking note of all these, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions;
(1) That the petitioner shall pay the entire amount due to the KFC in 6 equal monthly instalments.
(2) The first instalment shall be paid by him on or before 10/5/13 and the subsequent instalments shall be paid on or before the 10th of every succeeding month.
(3) Petitioner should also pay along with the first instalment an amount of `50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only), which will be paid by the KFC to the additional 8th respondent as compensation.
(4) If the petitioner pays the first instalment as above, immediately thereupon the amount deposited by the additional 8th respondent will be refunded to him.
(5) In case the petitioner commits default in paying the first instalment as ordered above, the sale will be confirmed in favour of the additional 8th respondent and after completing the procedural formalities, he will be put in possession of the property.
WPC.No.10331/12 :4 :
(6) In order to enable the petitioner to make payment as above, I direct that it will be open to the petitioner to approach the 3rd respondent, who thereupon will give him a statement indicating the total amount that is payable by him.
Sd/-
ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp